February Mid/Long Range Discussion 2

[Cobalt]

Just now, poolz1 said:

Well..not really.  Sure, if you are comparing cloudless days then acquiring a -20f departure is difficult feat.  Give me a dew of 26 and a hight of 47 with 12 hours before a deepening low off the coast and it's game on.  After the mauling, departures will read -8 for the event.

Very true. If anything, if we do get a big storm it'll be squished between 2 50 degree days this March. Yesterday's event shows that we can do that, and history in march shows that too. 

[Bob Chill]

42 minutes ago, poolz1 said:

Well..not really.  Sure, if you are comparing cloudless days then acquiring a -20f departure is difficult feat.  Give me a dew of 26 and a hight of 47, 12 hours before a deepening low off the coast and it's game on.  After the mauling, departures will read -8 for the event.

Exactly. It's pretty simple....it can get below freezing in march very easily. Get a good storm track with a normal type of cold high to the north and it snows with ease. It can be 50 the day before and after. Snow the first 10 days of March comes MUCH easier than the first 10 days of December. 

We hear the same arguments every single year....average high is 50+...sun angle...blah blah...but there have been numerous small, medium, and large snow storms in March. A bunch have happened very recently. Why? Becuase the first half of March climo supports snow when things line up. Might happen this year and it might not but climo is climo.  We should be more "shocked" when it snows before December 15th. 

[Bob Chill]

1 hour ago, Mdecoy said:

Well DC's average high at the beginning of March is in the low 50's.

So if we are managing below 32 degrees for a high, that kind of is, big cold. A bit of cold won't really get us there.

No, it's not "big cold". It's the mechanics of the atmosphere at work that you are completely overlooking. March warmth is shallow most of the time. It's very common to get sub freezing 925s and 850s in march but on a sunny day it hits 50 with ease. Take away the sun and add evap cooling and wet bulbing and it gets cold enough for snow. Were you not here yesterday? 

[BristowWx]

The coldest reading I have ever seen on my car was after that early March storm in 15..I think 15..going through the Manassas battlefield it was -4...it can get cold in March no doubt.  

[CAPE]

12 minutes ago, Bob Chill said:

No, it's not "big cold". It's the mechanics of the atmosphere at work that you are completely overlooking. March warmth is shallow most of the time. It's very common to get sub freezing 925s and 850s in march but on a sunny day it hits 50 with ease. Take away the sun and add evap cooling and wet bulbing and it gets cold enough for snow. Were you not here yesterday? 

It's futile dude. Look up numbskull and you might just see a picture of Decoy.

[Bob Chill]

6 minutes ago, C.A.P.E. said:

It's futile dude. Look up numbskull and you might just see a picture of Decoy.

It's becoming tiresome. Going through these same arguments every.single.year. 

[Cobalt]

15 minutes ago, BristowWx said:

The coldest reading I have ever seen on my car was after that early March storm in 15..I think 15..going through the Manassas battlefield it was -4...it can get cold in March no doubt.  

And just a year prior, wasn't it mid teens during the day of that early March storm in 2014? Certainly can get cold in March. 

[Bob Chill]

12 minutes ago, Cobalt said:

And just a year prior, wasn't it mid teens during the day of that early March storm in 2014? Certainly can get cold in March. 

Yea, that was very unusual though. That was true big cold for March or any winter month. 

The basic reasons March works better than early Dec is much colder oceans and much more expansive snowcover in source regions. Add the increasing energy from the sun and clashing air masses can create wild weather. 

Most here understand this stuff but some people look at average highs and ignore all the imortant details. I meant it when I said we should be more shocked at early Dec vs early March snowfall. It comes much easier in march...but it never comes easy anytime...lol

[nj2va]

HM calling for nor’easter first week of March on Twitter. I’m down. 

[Chris78]

7 minutes ago, nj2va said:

HM calling for nor’easter first week of March on Twitter. I’m down. 

Its always good when he is honking.

The last few runs of the GFS in fantasy range has hinted at that. Looks like the block would be fairly well established by then.

[mattie g]

6 hours ago, Tenman Johnson said:

If you relish and are seeking warm weather then don't post in a winter weather discussion thread. There is Banter for that 

This isn’t a winter-weather discussion thread. It’s a medium- to long-range discussion thread.

[Maestrobjwa]

51 minutes ago, nj2va said:

HM calling for nor’easter first week of March on Twitter. I’m down. 

So does the Farmer's Almanac...lol

[Mordecai]

18z gfs for March 4th

with the -NAO block, it's time for the fantasy storms to start (this one is believable)

[Cobalt]

1 minute ago, Mordecai said:

18z gfs for March 4th

Probably the signal of the storm showing up on operational. Something around that window, like HM said. We should see some juicy storms appearing within hr 300 any day now. We just need them to get within hr 96. lol

[Mordecai]

2 minutes ago, Cobalt said:

Probably the signal of the storm showing up on operational. Something around that window, like HM said. We should see some juicy storms appearing within hr 300 any day now. We just need them to get within hr 96. lol

So what's gonna happen is...

• Big snowstorms show up hr 300+
• Disappear within hr 120
• People start flooding this thread with "winter is over"
• Euro shows the big storm back on table at hr 84
• Everyone gets hyped
• A day out, the reality of models set in
• We get screwed while the Maryland and NW members get a decent amount

Rinse and repeat

[psuhoffman]

 

9 hours ago, Vice-Regent said:

There are actually a few days in succession that are near record highs. However the 500mb heights are what gets me the most. There will be cloud-cover and highs will not reach their maximum. By and large it was already warm before this pattern shift. I am skeptical of any sustained cold which is needed for big late season snows.

 

3 hours ago, Mdecoy said:

Well DC's average high at the beginning of March is in the low 50's.

So if we are managing below 32 degrees for a high, that kind of is, big cold. A bit of cold won't really get us there.

 

1 hour ago, C.A.P.E. said:

It's futile dude. Look up numbskull and you might just see a picture of Decoy.

 

1 hour ago, Bob Chill said:

It's becoming tiresome. Going through these same arguments every.single.year. 

CAPE and BOB I am doing this one time for dumb and dumber up there and everyone else that pulls this same crap out every freaking year so from now on all we have to do is link or copy this post...

" It can get below freezing in march very easily. Get a good storm track with a normal type of cold high to the north and it snows with ease. It can be 50 the day before and after. "

" No, it's not "big cold". It's the mechanics of the atmosphere at work that you are completely overlooking. March warmth is shallow most of the time. It's very common to get sub freezing 925s and 850s in march but on a sunny day it hits 50 with ease. Take away the sun and add evap cooling and wet bulbing and it gets cold enough for snow. Were you not here yesterday? "

Those from Bob sum up the issue here in a nutshell but just to make this crystal clear...here are some factual statistics to back this up and put this stupid argument that comes up every damn year to bed once and for all

I am using Baltimore for these averages because honestly DCA is not indicative of much of this area...and I fully admit getting snow at DCA is difficult any time of year and even worse in March...so if you live on an island in the middle of the Potomac south of DC then you probably aren't getting much snow in March...but you also probably aren't getting much snow ANY FREAKING TIME OF THE YEAR...

The average high in Baltimore today is 46.  The average high in early March is 49 and rises to 53 by March 15th.  Not a crazy difference... so lets start with the temperatue anomaly for yesterday when it was snowing here

WOW that looks so impressive...NOT.  And from range on an ensemble where many members will differ on the timing on specific storms or cold shots and that anomaly wouldn't even show up at all as weak as it was.  Yea by March we need a slightly colder anomaly but not by that much.  If that was enough to snow yesterday then stop acting like we need some blue ball of death to get snow.  If the warmth is shallow as it often is and Bob pointed out, it can easily snow with just the right storm track during an otherwise warmish period.  Blocking significantly increases the chances of that said "good storm track" and that is what has us excited.  Not the prospect of some bitter cold wave.

So what does the 850 temp anomaly look like...which is more important because as we already established a shallow boundary level warm layer will easily be overcome by the cooling processes during precipitation. 

That is about as good a look as we could possibly want right now.  Might not win but we couldn't draw up a better looking map.  Those anomalies at that range are plenty cold enough.  Especially if you factor in the members that are warm skewing things on any given day.  If the colder members are correct it will trend even colder.  If they are wrong none of this matters.

Finally...historical evidence to support what we are talking about

These are not all the March snows obviously but just some of the best examples of what we are talking about here. 

In 1924 it was 75 degrees on 3-30 then 38 with 9.4" of snow on April 1. 

In 1942 from 3-28 to 3-30 the highs were 47,36, and 54 and there was 22" of snow during the period.

1943 from 3-16 to 2-26 the high temps looked like this

72,67,67,67,67,67,46,44,48,61,68,73

somewhere in there was 6" of snow...but would you guess looking at the temperatures?

1964 between 3-9 and 3-25 the temps looked like

79,77,67,42,49,50,41,47,50,63,74

and somewhere in there was 11.5"

1965 on 3-16 and 3-17 it was 59 and 39 degrees and 4.3" fell

1968 from 3-9 to 3-12 high temps were 75, 57, 55, and 41 and 4.4" fell

1976 there was a week in February with record highs in the upper 70s

then from 3-5 to 3-9 temps were

83,64,60,51,42 and 7.8" of fell

2009 it was 65 on 2-27 and 3 days later 5.8" fell and it was 53 the day it started.

2014 3-15 it was 66 degrees and 3-16 45 degrees and that an 8" snowstorm started that evening

Those are all facts... things that HAVE happened in history.  None of those March snowstorms had arctic cold periods and most of them featured very warm days right before and after snow.  Many of them the day's it snowed recorded highs in the 40s.  So you can keep arguing that we can't snow in March without some crazy cold anomaly but history says you are wrong. 

[SnowLover22]

I am be wrong but don’t models have a better time predicting storms in the longer range when there is blocking in place to slow down the flow?


.

[WEATHER53]

So we take another 70's break and then hope this block thing shows. I want it to. I got lucky with perhaps my best driving the car in snow experience-Hit 195 at Baltimore Beltway headed south and its moderate snow and wet road and 35 so I'm thinking nice steady snow but easy roads .  Snow gets heavy in minutes with visibility down to 0.2 and temp down to 32.roads get slushy fast and in few more minutes 1-2" accumulation off the roads. Huge flakes just overwhelming the windshield.  South of 32 it started mixing but road was a mess and traffic slow  Precip mixed rest of way home, 

2" compacted and was probably closer to 3 before sleet and rain 

 

 

 

 

[psuhoffman]

6 hours ago, frd said:

Yep, not there yet to the extent of the GEFS, but hopefully it will continue to improve. There are even slight signals that beyond March 5 th the Pac improves.  

 

6 hours ago, C.A.P.E. said:

We will see on the PAC side. I am not expecting much more than it becomes/stays serviceable for a time, as opposed to hostile. Even the CFS has recently moved away from the idea of a nice PAC look, after many runs where it looked pretty favorable for early March. The upcoming pattern all hinges on a legit -NAO...a big time mega block that retrogrades into the Davis Strait and Canada. If the models are overdoing that look, and the PAC is typical Nina crap, we may very well end up with another super awesome looking modeled NA pattern that doesn't actually materialize and produce.

I'm not that worried about the PAC if the depiction of a retrograding block across North America is accurate. Actually in such an extreme a better Pacific might just help squash things south of here. Look at some of the crazy runs already showing where storms that start NW of us get forced under by the blocking.   Now if the blocking isn't as extreme then the PAC faults become a problem. 1962 is just one example of how this kind of blocking can work without PAC help. 

[WestminsterSnowCapitalMA]

if that blizzard stays at 384 on each run of the gfs it will never get here

[cbmclean]

1 hour ago, psuhoffman said:

Actually in such an extreme a better Pacific might just help squash things south of here.

We in NC say "bring it on".

Seriously, though, I am not expecting much of anything down here beyond some nice cold rain.  As one who likes cold for its own sake, I will be happy if we can just stop the early spring in its tracks.

I bet you guys are salivating at the possibilities, even ig they are still a long ways off.

 

[Jebman]

This subforum is going to get shellacked/outright annihilated by snow sometime in the next 4 weeks. The blocking may end up making a fairly ordinary snowstorm much, much better for us.

Get the shovels ready. Get the snowblowers ready. Hope you are in good physical shape. Check the snow tires.

[TowsonWeather]

That 384 panel at 0Z is weather porn - hehe. That's not a "how many inches?" look, that's a "how many feet?" look.

Obviously just digital snow, but it shows what a block can do. Long way away still, but that's a great look to see.

[Mordecai]

I have to post it. March is going to be fun

[rcflyermd68]

Anthony Masiello‏ @antmasiello

FollowFollow @antmasiello

More

My final thought is: my gut says this pattern will deliver a nor'easter to the East Coast in first week of Mar. The buckling jet throughout the NH and retrogression as a result of this -NAM flip will eventually align the trough here.

1:06 PM - 18 Feb 2018

 

•  

[rcflyermd68]

wow  what  a block!! pardon  me  I,m using JB twitter page for this, 2nd graph  on page

https://twitter.com/BigJoeBastardi

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

12 hours ago, Bob Chill said:

It's becoming tiresome. Going through these same arguments every.single.year. 

Ha!  I hear you on that.  Several times, even recently, we've scored quite well in early to even mid-March (heck, even later in March with good anomalies).  The look up-top at 500 mb heading into the first part of March is really good, so I'll take that and run with it.  Still could fail and we end up with nothing, but if we're hoping for a last-minute Hail Mary to salvage something, that's what you want things to look like.

The only time I really care about sun angle is when I'm sweltering out on the softball fields in late July! 

[EastCoast NPZ]

10 hours ago, psuhoffman said:

 

 

Good write up, PSU.  I find this anomaly map a bit confusing though.  With higher heights in the NOA domain space, why would there be negative temp anomalies in Greenland?

[AfewUniversesBelowNormal]

3 hours ago, rcflyermd68 said:

Anthony Masiello‏ @antmasiello

FollowFollow @antmasiello

More

My final thought is: my gut says this pattern will deliver a nor'easter to the East Coast in first week of Mar. The buckling jet throughout the NH and retrogression as a result of this -NAM flip will eventually align the trough here.

1:06 PM - 18 Feb 2018

 

•  

I disagree

 

Anyway, Wednesday is trending warmer. It stops here

Mostly sunny, with a high near 73. Southwest wind 9 to 13 mph.

[Kmlwx]

3 minutes ago, AfewUniversesBelowNormal said:

I disagree

Your disagreement isn't particularly useful without some sort of explanation or details. Not trying to be mean - but if you're going to reply with "I disagree" and provide no other insight...you might be better off not posting it at all.